VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

Keep VAF Going
Donate methods

Point your
camera app here
to donate fast.

  #11  
Old 02-23-2021, 12:30 PM
Frogman208 Frogman208 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: San Diego,ca
Posts: 51
Default Dont forget Whirlwind

Garth,

Late to party but maybe you will see this. Don't discount Whirlwind propeller. They have a new propeller called 330 series that will compete against the MT MTV-9 propeller. I had the same issues with 200 HP, non-counterweight crank, and harmonic issues (read RPM restrictions). Had the 2 blade Hartzell (with RPM) restriction) and MT MTV-12 (with RPM) restrictions and now flying Whirlwind 330 series/3-blade with NO restrictions. The Whirlwind 330 series is a new design (basically 72HRT blades and beefed up 300 series hub). Comes in at 52 pounds, which is lighter than MT MTV-9 and Hartzell 2 blade weight. I have a prototype 3 blade design but I believe they are going to make a 2-blade design also (even less weight). You really need to call Whirlwind in San Diego and talk with Hunter or the owner Jim before you order the MT MTV-9. Don't get me wrong, I think MT makes a great propeller and MTV-9 is a great propeller but at close to 20K versus 14K for the 330 series is a lot of money.
__________________
Scott
RV-9A/N32LK-SOLD
RV-6A/N27KP-SOLD
Flying RV-7/N74RV
Flying Cessna 140
Dues Paid

Last edited by Frogman208 : 02-23-2021 at 12:31 PM. Reason: grammer
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-24-2021, 11:45 AM
SkyJunkie SkyJunkie is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Baldwin City
Posts: 6
Default

It seems like there is always more to the story. It is my understanding that the Whirlwind is untested and uncertified. One of the last things you want to worry about while flying is the integrity of your propeller. I would never run an uncertified prop, period.

If you are thinking of ordering a propeller you need to check out the pricing, the MTV-9 is $15,450 retail not $20,000 and McFarlane normally sells them for 10% off or $13,950, same as the uncertified Whirlwind.

One last point is I would think about is re-sale of the aircraft. Because the MT propeller is a certified propeller it will add value to your work and all you have invested in the aircraft. At some point in time the aircraft will be sold, it will sell for more with a known certified propeller.

Last edited by SkyJunkie : 02-24-2021 at 12:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-24-2021, 12:11 PM
Freemasm Freemasm is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Orlando
Posts: 287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyJunkie View Post
It seem like there is always more to the story. It is my understanding that the Whirlwind is untested and uncertified. One of the last things you want to worry about while flying is the integrity of your propeller. I would never run an uncertified prop, period.

If you are thinking of ordering a propeller you need to check out the pricing, the MTV-9 is $15,450 retail not $20,000 and McFarlane normally sell them for 10% off or $13,950, same as the uncertified Whirlwind.

One last point is I would think about is re-sale of the aircraft. Because the MT propeller is a certified propeller it will add value to your work and all you have invested in the aircraft. At some point in time the aircraft will be sold, it will sell for more with a known certified propeller.
"untested." Strong and inaccurate word. I came from certified Mooney world. There are great products and complete trash in both certified and EAB fleets. I am an anal AF engineer and have been impressed many times with some products available to EABs. It's not hard to find which companies have good engineered products and earned reputations. Just because a product has a significant paper trail doesn't mean it's safe or reliable (737 MAX). Just because something was developed outside of the known players or FAA cert processes doesn't mean it's not viable (Garmin G3, initially). There's a ton of examples the members here could reference. One of the great things about EAB, you can put a certified propeller onto your uncertified power plant which is attached to your uncertified airframe.
Another point (sorry, I’ll stop), most certified singles have f’ing horrible electrical system architecture but they are certified. Would a builder of similar mindset to the quoted forgo the advantages of safer architecture to mimic that of an aircraft that had a TC?

Last edited by Freemasm : 02-24-2021 at 01:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-24-2021, 12:42 PM
BloomerJohn's Avatar
BloomerJohn BloomerJohn is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 90 MI E of Mpls MN
Posts: 34
Default

I will stay with MT and my wife feels much more at ease when she found there has been zero in-flight failures of MT props with over 80,000 in use. No other mfr she researched could claim the same stats. A whirlwind prop lost a blade in flight at a European Airshow and resulted in the loss of the pilot. Hartzell metal props have long history of AD's and some blade failures due to nicks and FOD. Their composite props are pretty new and don't have a lot of numbers or time in use to compare to MT. She also found comfort in the fact the MT wood core has no life limits and is not subject to fatigue or failure even when damaged. Somewhere in the web she found an article with pics of a twin engine plane that did a gear up landing, broke off almost half of each MT prop blade and then powered up, climbed and circled the airport for 14 minutes aloft before making a normal landing. The pilot commented his life was saved because of the design of the MT props and how they sheared cleanly at impact and allowed for continued operation.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-24-2021, 12:50 PM
Frogman208 Frogman208 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: San Diego,ca
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyJunkie View Post
It seems like there is always more to the story. It is my understanding that the Whirlwind is untested and uncertified. One of the last things you want to worry about while flying is the integrity of your propeller. I would never run an uncertified prop, period.

If you are thinking of ordering a propeller you need to check out the pricing, the MTV-9 is $15,450 retail not $20,000 and McFarlane normally sells them for 10% off or $13,950, same as the uncertified Whirlwind.

One last point is I would think about is re-sale of the aircraft. Because the MT propeller is a certified propeller it will add value to your work and all you have invested in the aircraft. At some point in time the aircraft will be sold, it will sell for more with a known certified propeller.
Fair points SkyJunkie however the $13.9K price is NOT what I was quoted from McFarlane for one that was in stock at the time but not recent so that may have changed. Experimental vs Certified is very obviously debatable and nothing wrong with MT propellers. My intention was to mention other options available outside MT and Hartzell for non-counterweight engines.
__________________
Scott
RV-9A/N32LK-SOLD
RV-6A/N27KP-SOLD
Flying RV-7/N74RV
Flying Cessna 140
Dues Paid

Last edited by Frogman208 : 02-24-2021 at 02:08 PM. Reason: Price
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-24-2021, 03:17 PM
Frogman208 Frogman208 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: San Diego,ca
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloomerJohn View Post
I will stay with MT and my wife feels much more at ease when she found there has been zero in-flight failures of MT props with over 80,000 in use. No other mfr she researched could claim the same stats. A whirlwind prop lost a blade in flight at a European Airshow and resulted in the loss of the pilot. Hartzell metal props have long history of AD's and some blade failures due to nicks and FOD. Their composite props are pretty new and don't have a lot of numbers or time in use to compare to MT. She also found comfort in the fact the MT wood core has no life limits and is not subject to fatigue or failure even when damaged. Somewhere in the web she found an article with pics of a twin engine plane that did a gear up landing, broke off almost half of each MT prop blade and then powered up, climbed and circled the airport for 14 minutes aloft before making a normal landing. The pilot commented his life was saved because of the design of the MT props and how they sheared cleanly at impact and allowed for continued operation.
Hey John just out of curiosity, can you share the information on the European Airshow propeller failure? First time I've heard of that and would really like to know if that's accurate. Thanks for sharing
__________________
Scott
RV-9A/N32LK-SOLD
RV-6A/N27KP-SOLD
Flying RV-7/N74RV
Flying Cessna 140
Dues Paid
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-24-2021, 06:19 PM
Bavafa Bavafa is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,496
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloomerJohn View Post
Somewhere in the web she found an article with pics of a twin engine plane that did a gear up landing, broke off almost half of each MT prop blade and then powered up, climbed and circled the airport for 14 minutes aloft before making a normal landing. The pilot commented his life was saved because of the design of the MT props and how they sheared cleanly at impact and allowed for continued operation.
I don't know the circumstance of the situation that someone losing almost half of each blade and still decide to go back up in the air if he had already done a gear up landing but on the surface it sounds, at best, like a poor judgement in aviating. In fact I am wondering with the gear up landing, how do you get it back to the speed that the plane can actually start flying again? Who knows I guess.

MT is a great prop, no doubt but I lost faith in them when my buddy had to sent his back just after a year or less of flying and they would not cover any of the repair cost. I can't remember if there was an AD on the prop or was spiting grease but it was not damaged due to accident or negligent.
Of course their prop governor typically on a 360 engine which is the JIHOSTROJ brand made in Czech republic and they just stick their own tag on it, has a calendar year overhaul where as if you buy the exact governor from JIHOSTROJ, it does not.
__________________
Mehrdad
N825SM RV7A - IO360M1B - SOLD
N825MS RV14A - IO390 - Flying
Dues paid
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-24-2021, 07:32 PM
David Paule David Paule is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 4,665
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyJunkie View Post
It seems like there is always more to the story. It is my understanding that the Whirlwind is ... uncertified....
Well, so are our airplanes.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-02-2021, 06:03 PM
Frogman208 Frogman208 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: San Diego,ca
Posts: 51
Default

So I never heard back from BloomerJohn on the alleged Whirlwind prop failure in Europe sometime in the past but looking at his profile, his name is the same John Nielsen from Flight Resources (maybe a coincident) and a website under mtprops.com. If so, I've spoken to him on the phone and he is a really nice guy and passionate about MT propellers. I agree with him that MT propeller makes an absolute great propeller and can stand on their own without someone making 'false' or inaccurate statements about other propeller manufacturers (Whirlwind or Hartzell). I've talked to Whirlwind and they have no knowledge of a blade failure in Europe with one of their propellers. I hate calling something like this out in a forum and I hope I"m still adhering to Doug's rules but I just don't like inaccurate information just floating out there. If I'm wrong, would somebody please research the European incident and post it.
__________________
Scott
RV-9A/N32LK-SOLD
RV-6A/N27KP-SOLD
Flying RV-7/N74RV
Flying Cessna 140
Dues Paid
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-03-2021, 07:55 AM
Freemasm Freemasm is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Orlando
Posts: 287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogman208 View Post
So I never heard back from BloomerJohn on the alleged Whirlwind prop failure in Europe sometime in the past but looking at his profile, his name is the same John Nielsen from Flight Resources (maybe a coincident) and a website under mtprops.com. If so, I've spoken to him on the phone and he is a really nice guy and passionate about MT propellers. I agree with him that MT propeller makes an absolute great propeller and can stand on their own without someone making 'false' or inaccurate statements about other propeller manufacturers (Whirlwind or Hartzell). I've talked to Whirlwind and they have no knowledge of a blade failure in Europe with one of their propellers. I hate calling something like this out in a forum and I hope I"m still adhering to Doug's rules but I just don't like inaccurate information just floating out there. If I'm wrong, would somebody please research the European incident and post it.
As far as I'm concerned, Bloomerjohn's reputation is zero'd out and he has hurt the integrity of MT propellers at least in the short term. He has a direct link to MT in his profile. It's great that someone loves their product and no one is faulted for promoting such. Most everyone takes advantage of their competition's missteps (BTW I have great admiration for Ross of SDS that always seems to stay above the fray when the sh!t slinging starts). Sales puffery is protected speech. Libel/defamation are not. If there are facts to support the claims made, they should be responsibly shared. As it stands, it appears to be a shameless attempt at a smear. @Bloomerjohn; if you can share any supporting facts, it would be appreciated by all.

Last edited by Freemasm : 03-03-2021 at 08:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:55 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.